Reluctant England takes first step towards independence from Britain

by Robert TaylorRobert Taylor is a London-based writer, consultant and media trainer. He has provided training and consultancy for organisations throughout the world, including assignments in the US, Brazil, China, India, South Africa and Russia.25.09.2014

“No taxation without representation”, cried Americans on their way to independence from Britain two and a half centuries ago. A similar cry is now heard throughout England’s green and pleasant land: “English votes for English laws”.

In the wake of Scotland voting No to independence last week, the English are finally realising how badly the British constitution discriminates against England. And they are demanding fair democratic representation.

It’s 16 years since Tony Blair’s government denied England the democratic rights it gave to the UK’s other countries. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were given their own national parliaments or assemblies, through which they govern themselves on a range of matters, but the English continued to be governed by the British Parliament, to which the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish elected members. So, since 1998, England has been the only country within the UK, indeed the only major Western country, to have no government of its own.

Did this extraordinary constitutional unfairness trouble the British establishment? Not at all. Although England was, and remains, a mighty big elephant in a small room, it could safely be ignored – because the English seemed not to care. The English elephant was fast asleep.

But all this has now changed. Two weeks ago, the elephant woke up with a violent start – at the sight of Britain’s political establishment, panicking that Scotland might vote Yes, placating the Scottish voters with yet more devolved powers over taxation, spending and welfare. Now that the Scots have accepted the bribe, and voted No, those promises must be kept. The effect will be to make Scotland an even greater master over its own destiny while unashamedly still sending representatives to the British parliament to vote on all matters affecting England.

If it was unfair on England before, it is now intolerable.

The fact that England is reacting only now to 16 years of constitutional victimisation is not difficult to fathom. Englishness has always been regarded as something disgraceful, particularly on the vocal left of British politics. As George Orwell wrote, ''England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality.’’

An exaggeration? Hardly. The Labour Party’s Jack Straw, a former Foreign Secretary, famously wrote off his fellow Englishman as “potentially very aggressive, very violent. We have used this propensity to violence.” Just last week, Tony Blair’s former spin doctor, the English-born, English-raised and English-educated Alastair Campbell (albeit of Scottish parents), wrote “I feel British first, Scottish second, Yorkshire – where I was born – third and English a long way behind.” And the Guardian newspaper columnist, Simon Hattenstone, wrote this week: “England had become a nation of penalty-missers, contract-outers, public-school twits and twats, bigots and Bullingdon club bullies, snarling bulldogs and rapacious bankers.”

With so many leaders and opinion-formers telling them how shameful their nationality is, it’s no wonder the English have perfected the art of subservient anti-nationalism. They have seen it as a virtue to plod along uncomplainingly, even as nearly two thousand pounds more per head of population goes in public funding to Scotland than to England – mainly funded by English tax-payers. Nor have the English objected to their country having few of the national symbols and institutions that others take for granted, such as a national broadcaster (there is a BBC Scotland, a BBC Wales and a BBC Northern Ireland, but no BBC England) and a national anthem (before international rugby and soccer matches, the English have to make do with the British anthem, God Save the Queen.)

Only now that the unfairness has become so acute are millions of English people waking up to it. They are making their case in a typically polite, undemonstrative way. But the volume is being turned up, and across the land they are beginning to insist on something that should have been theirs for the last 16 years – an English parliament, based well away from London, granted the same powers as the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies.

And they are in no mood to be conned by the self-serving proposal from the Labour Party that England should be divided into regions, each with its own assembly and devolved powers – a thinly veiled plan to Balkanise England, setting off one region against another, while seeking to discourage any sense of English national identity.

Nor should they trust Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who now professes his concern about the democratic imbalance. Yet it’s only a few years since he told me at a public meeting that he considered English nationalists campaigning for an English parliament to be “nutty” (failing to explain why he would never say such a thing about Welsh and Scottish nationalists).

And even Prime Minister David Cameron, who is suddenly championing the cause of English devolution, is not above suspicion. If English democracy is so close to his heart, why he didn’t act on it more forcibly when entering Downing Street in May 2010, and make it part of the coalition agreement?

English voices must now be heard, or something far more dramatic could be in store. Until recently, a belief in English independence from Britain was regarded as eccentric, unthinkable – even nutty. Now, according to the latest surveys, 31% of the English support it.

Britain had been warned. Correct the anti-English unfairness. Give England a parliament within a federal UK. Or sow the seeds of an eventual constitutional tsunami: England walking out on Britain.

When, as is rumoured, David Beckham receives a knighthood at Buckingham Palace next year, Britain should be celebrating the death knell of its crazy class system, and welcoming an American-style meritocracy in its place. For there, receiving the...

Rate this article

Click the stars to rate

Comments (16)

England has no-one to get independent from.

by Olli Raade Editor to Facts & Arts

The Blair administration’s decision to grant more political rights - like own national parliaments or assemblies - to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but not for England, might have accidentally given the message that the U.K. is basically an English concept. As if granting more independence for England, similarly to the other three, would be absurd, while England has no-one to get independent from. Therefor, the Blair administration’s decision might in fact have fueled the Scottish independence drive.

Olli RaadeEditor to Facts & Arts

No room for an English Parliament

by Charlie Pryor

I agree with the sentiment that England needs to have the say over its own legislation, or perhaps more that Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh MPs shouldn't vote on English-only measures. But that doesn't mean we need an English Parliament. Time and again, voters have said no to regional assemblies; just ask John Prescott. We don't particularly like politicians so we don't want to add another layer. Nor do we want to pay for them. And a federal state would require a huge re-working of the constitution.

A much better and pragmatic solution - and after all, our constitution is one based on evolution - is to have debates and votes in Parliament for which only English MPs are eligible. It would side-step the need for another layer of government and answer Tam Dayell's question. Most importantly, it would give England what it wants - I genuinely don't think there is a real England Independence movement.

Yes, but...

by Theocritos

I do like and admire your passion Mr Taylor. Your argument is well constructed and convincing, but I do have some push-back.

It was obvious that the Scottish referendum was predicated on an anti-English theme. The fishy duo, devoid of anything more than meaningless and unsubstantiated promises did just about everything except paint half their faces blue to dismiss Westminster, ridicule the Three Amigos and pour scorn on anything vaguely English. Thankfully the electorate didn't fall for it.

So I believe that your suggestion of an up-swell of support for English independence comes out of the same barrel. It's not English independence, it's anti-Scots and hardly surprising given the sensationalist rabble rousing of the media over the last couple of months.

To the point, England has no need to be independent. It is bigger, more powerful and more recognised than the other three put together. It "owns" the money, the Government and the language. And on the World stage it embraces the quirky cultures of its partners in Britain and blatantly leverages them for its own use. The other three countries are assets to a prosperous and strong England. Why walk away from that? It would only weaken the position.

Politically I would agree that there has to be reform. However, a separate English Parliament is a ghastly idea and would merely provide a huge opportunity for wasted time and money. English issues can easily be decided in a reformed committee structure in the HoP. And "far away from London" sounds ominously like a Manchester parliament. God forbid. Just God forbid.

The truth of the matter is that the Holyrood, Stormont and Cardiff are ways of making the lesser nations - which they are - feel as though they are in control. It's a good idea as it improves decision making and enables local issues to be addressed. But it is akin to a multi-national having operational boards, with a supervisory board sitting over the top. There may be marginal differences in local tax, spending and education, but on the really big issues, we act as one. If we go to war, we all go to war. If the pound devalues or strengthens it affects us all. And the vital trade relationships with the rest of the World which keep us all going, remain British, recognising the unique synergy of the Union.

So, rather than jumping on the bandwagon and seeking independence, why doesn't England wake up and realise that it is the grown-up in this family. Strategically it gets more than it gives from the Union. It owns the fundamentals. It leads more than it follows. And the campaign message is correct. We are better together.

Devolution

by Fred

Yes the act of devolution discriminated deliberately against the English and all people who live in England, it can be considered a Racist plan. We must ask why the minutes of the meeting for devolution are not to be released, but since the Scottish Independence debate there is no reason to with hold this document, information show so far how anti English it was it must be public and those repsponsible investigated.

Not again!

by Mr Rob

Charlie Pryor: "But that doesn't mean we need an English Parliament. Time and again, voters have said no to regional assemblies"

Can you spot the mistake? In fact, most recent polls show a majority of English in favour of having their own Parliament.

labour Elephant oop North

by Trev

Don't underestimate the effect of removing so many Scots MPs [Labours] from the equation at Westminster leaves a hole that can't be filled until we have another industrial revolution. Politicians are good at trying to stop time and legislate for it be forever so -but they always fail.
People who actually pick up the unfair differential tax tab are indeed entitled to ask for a fair show.
There is a lot of anti Englishness about in the corridors of power and many reasons for it- not one of these is due to bad behaviour by the English.
Surely football hooliganism can't be the reason for all this? Maybe it is... but not a good one, really?
Pooh-poohing away the idea of a balancing English administration is just not good enough.

Yorkshire Lass

by Tyke

The English elephant is awake now. The Left think the English are revolting. I don't intend to disappoint them.

labour Elephant oop North

by Trev

Don't underestimate the effect of removing so many Scots MPs [Labours] from the equation at Westminster leaves a hole that can't be filled until we have another industrial revolution. Politicians are good at trying to stop time and legislate for it be forever so -but they always fail.
People who actually pick up the unfair differential tax tab are indeed entitled to ask for a fair show.
There is a lot of anti Englishness about in the corridors of power and many reasons for it- not one of these is due to bad behaviour by the English.
Surely football hooliganism can't be the reason for all this? Maybe it is... but not a good one, really?
Pooh-poohing away the idea of a balancing English administration is just not good enough.

English votes for English law wont work.

by tbaker

And here's why, imagine labour has won the general election by a slim majority so then becomes the government. They promised say educational reform..... Can they touch education? NO labours majority would be partly due to their Scottish MP's meaning no majority on English matters. And there are many other examples of where this would happen. As for the argument of extra cost that depends on how the gov is made up as British government could be streamlined reducing MP numbers whilst the English gov could be an appropriate size and if the each home nation fund their own govs then it would mean actually the English are paying for less politicians as we currently subsidise the assemblys/parliaments in the rUK

The realist

by Rob

The only real solution is English independence, the genie is out of the bottle and UKIP are offering the English a voice, others will have to change policy or we will leave. Time to stop Celtic scrounging and sponging..:.

Enough...

by Alfred the OK

No more waffle. No more blue sky thinking. No more interminable Commissions into the English Question with their inevitable conclusion of being kicked into the long grass...

ENGLISH PARLIAMENT NOW! - It's called national democracy, time we in England had some.

England must remain whole

by Wessex man

Why are so many know all's advocating England being split into regions
Why is it OK to be a nationlist unless you're English ?

An English Executive

by Peter Mason

The key problem with 'English Votes for English Laws' in the HoP is that few laws are officially English; either there are clauses affecting the other nations or the dreaded Barnett formula gives rise to funding consequences. The only way to have EV for EL is by separating policy and laws pertaining to England [i.e. the same deal as Scotland]. Any other arrangement will either be a sop or involve Balkanising England.

Anglophobia and inequality

by Mike Aethelmaer

I'm an Englishman I was not my choice nor do feel pride in things I had no part in such as English history. Equally when I am presented by some "racial and historical" debt for the "alleged" deeds of my ancestors I feel no guilt nor feel I "owe" anyone from any other nation anything.
When I present a argument based on equality to groups across the political spectrum I am met with hostility and blatant Anglophobia which appears to be the last legal form of racism.
Scots,Welsh and Irish are brainwashed about the evil English from childhood. Much in the same way the Nazi's brainwashed the Hitler Youth about Jews and the hatred of us is at best voiced in ignorance and worst visceral and violent hatred.
The terms "Little Englander" or even a couple of occasions "Fascist" "Racist" or "Nazi" have been used against me. This for simply asking that England and the English be treated just like any other people on this island or indeed the planet. No better than anyone just the same as everyone.
For some like myself this is no longer a question of polite asking for what in a equal society should be ours at birth
I'll no longer bow the knee to a Celtic mafia and "Jockocracy" run upper middle class plastic Communists.
I'll no longer sing "God save the Queen" nor lift a weapon to defend any nation other than England.
I would willingly urinate on the Union flag then sling that sodden rag on a bonfire with the effigy of the Queen sat on top not Guy Fawkes.
No more blatantly racist, xenophobic and Anglophobic hatred based fairy tales will be tolerated by the likes of myself.
May be it's time we English took note from our Celtic neighbors and started doing what was done in Ireland. Scotland and Wales?
Last but not least the name used here is my family name and it's been on this Island longer than any Royalty but all I want is to treated as an equal in my native homeland. Is this too much too ask or am I "racist" for wanting equality?

Time for renewal

by Clive

We are an ancient democracy, built over many centuries based on tradition and precedent. Fine, but other countries who came later to democracy had the chance to start afresh. As a result, governance in the UK has fallen behind many of our friends and competitors, manifesting in an over-centralised administration and an economy skewed to the UK capital. Time now to update our democracy, decentralising power further and renewing archaic institutions such as the House of Lords. The proposal to hold a UK Constitutional Convention is the right way forward. It gives us the opportunity to redefine the way we're governed in a thoughtful and inclusive manner, and to set a framework that draws power closer to all the people and nations of the UK. That's the way to solve the West Lothian question - and to preserve our union for decades and centuries to come.

Simple option

by Gareth Robson

I agree with those who have posted in favour of an independent England.

I do not agree, however, that England could or should in some way leave the UK - an impossibility. Instead, the three nations plus the province of NI need to work out a long, steady transition plan to take us from where we are (a creaking UK) to 3 independent nations plus NI looked after as a province transitionally by England, or by Scotland, or even by the Republic of Ireland, to the point in time when it is ready to join the Republic.

Comments Policy

Comments that contribute civilly and constructively to the discussion
of the topic, from any point of view, are welcome; comments that are
not civil or constructive are not.

Facts & Arts is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.